From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guenter Roeck Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2014 18:15:11 +0000 Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH 1/3] hwmon: (lm63) Create attributes for LM96163 in one call Message-Id: <52EE8B2F.1030906@roeck-us.net> List-Id: References: <1390243126-19519-2-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> In-Reply-To: <1390243126-19519-2-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org On 02/02/2014 10:02 AM, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Guenter, > > On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 10:38:44 -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> There is no need to have both an attribute group plus an individual attribute >> for LM96163. Add the attribute to the group and create all attributes with one >> call. > > The idea of having groups (or single attributes) per extra feature > rather than per chip was to be able to reuse them when adding support > for a new chip implementing a subset of the extra features. It wasn't > an overlook, it was implemented that way on purpose. You can argue that > the extra complexity may never be needed, but nobody objected back > then. > Or nobody cared ;-). > Now I do understand that single attributes don't fit well with the way > you implemented devm_hwmon_device_register_with_groups(). You could > still create a group for that attribute so that you can register it > with that function. Then you only have another group to register, no > big deal. > > Would that be OK for you? > Sure, I can do that, no problem. As you said, no big deal. Thanks, Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors